Liberals feared that a Mitt Romney presidency could mean the end of the most significant piece of social legislation in half a century. Conservatives feared a second Obama term would allow implementation of another massive entitlement program. But for hospital administrators and businesses like health insurance companies and drug makers, the biggest fear on election night was that they would be left with an enormous mess to clean up.

Although the Affordable Care Act, passed in 2010, won’t be fully in place until 2014, billions of dollars have already been distributed and the wheels of reform have begun to turn. Seniors with Medicare prescription drug coverage are getting cash rebates. Young adults have joined their parents’ insurance policies. Uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions are getting health coverage through Obamacare programs. Some states are setting up health insurance consumer assistance bureaus and drawing up the architecture for new exchanges where private health insurance will be sold and regulated. Stopping all of that, which Romney vowed to do if not by edict then by throwing truckloads of sand in the government’s regulatory gears, would have created chaos.

The ability of critics to challenge the law’s legitimacy was drastically reduced with the Supreme Court upholding its constitutionality earlier this year. But it is also important that Obama Administration officials will be in charge during the law’s full implementation. Hospitals, insurers, drug companies and patients can now expect a more orderly rollout of the Affordable Care Act over the next few years. As Jennifer Haberkorn reported in Politico last week, the Obama Administration recently reduced the flow of new regulations defining precisely how the legislative language of Obamacare would work in practice. The purpose of holding back new rules was to avoid controversy close to the election. As Haberkorn reported, there’s now a backlog of new regulations that are expected to be unveiled soon, including some that could affect wide swaths of the population. We still don’t know, for example, what health services and expenses insurers will be required to cover under Obamacare.

At the same time, governors will soon decide whether to set up their own health insurance marketplaces to regulate individual and small business health plans. Many Republican governors had held off making this call until after the election. States that opt not to set up exchanges will open the door for the federal government to run them instead. Thanks to a part of the Supreme Court Obamacare ruling that left the law’s large Medicaid expansion as optional instead of mandatory for states, governors and state legislatures will also have to decide whether to widen eligibility for the public insurance program. (Here’s a reliable timeline of Obamacare provisions and when they are scheduled to go into effect.) As Phil Galewitz reported for Kaiser Health News, some state-based Republicans may be persuaded to get on board with such pieces of the law now that it’s definitely staying on the books.

Mike Fasano, a Republican and one of the longest serving Florida lawmakers, said with the president’s win, the GOP-dominated state legislature would “take a hard look” at expanding Medicaid — despite the opposition of Republican Gov. Rick Scott.

Fasano, who is moving from the state Senate to the state House next year, said Florida can’t afford to miss out on new revenue without having its own plan to help more than four million residents who lack health insurance.

He acknowledged that challenging Scott would be an uphill battle but said the governor’s waning popularity might embolden lawmakers.

Despite the Affordable Care Act’s more certain future under an Obama second term, controversy over the law isn’t over. The public is still largely split on its merits. Republican state lawmakers and governors won’t suddenly and universally back the law. Republicans in Congress still have say over funding for some of its programs.

But the health care industry is now free from a great deal of uncertainty. Or at least it’s free from this round of uncertainty. Any policy, business sector or law that’s tangled up with politics will always retain a tinge of the unknown. See here.

The man that bamboozled USA and the WORLD ! ( INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP )

Obama wrote this biography of himself to promote his first book back in 1991. Again, this was written in 1991 before he was even thought of as a competitive politician. Barack Obama says it himself he was born in Kenya and raised in Hawaii.

Either he lied (why?) or we are living through one of the truly greatest cover-ups & FRAUD of our time.

SEARCH: Obama Admits Born in Kenya - Part 2 HARD EVIDENCESee all pertinent videos and SHARE

Surely another marker -- both peculiar and particular -- of how unprepared Mitt Romney was/is for a leadership roll is the enormous surprise which he reportedly has suffered at his loss. That surprise is echoed by his aides, his backers, and an array of right-wing pundits.

Yet there was certainly no shortage of polls indicating that he was behind and out of touch. Proof? The fact that evidently he does not read newspapers, or any other communication which offers him a truth he does not want to hear.

Instead, he relied on the likes of the equally-delusional megalomaniac Karl Rove to supply a reality that he could live with: that he would win. That the polls were "over-polling" democrats. That he had his finger on the pulse of the American personality. That he should let others do the thinking.

How prepared to lead is a man who is so easily deceived by his own aides and advisors -- a man who does so little (and such poor) critical thinking of his own?

We have escaped, by however small a margin, a monumental disaster. Maybe there is something here to think about during the Thanksgiving festivities.

"Would you rather have a civil rights lawyer as a prez. or a man that made millions from building and maintaining companies"

How conveniently you overlook the fact that, while at Bain, 22% of Romney'sbusiness ventures ended in bankruptcy, and another 8% were such dismalfailures that Bain lost all the money it had invested in them. Thats a30% failure rate. So much for Romney's "business genius." Thenanswer: I'd much rather have a competent constitutional lawyer forpresident, than an incompetent "businessman" who thinks god was once aman who became god, and that any man can follow that example and become agod.

But then, Republicans have thrived on delusion for 50 years.Somany of you conservatives/Republicans, dumbfounded about the electionresults, wondering about the state of America, and where it has gone wrong, are hauntingthe blogs this week, moaning and whining about why you lost and howeverything and every one OTHER than the Republican party is responsiblefor its failure and disintegration.

The reasons for your failure, and why you will continue to lose, moving forward, are easy to understand.If your platform were really what you claim -- fiscal conservatism, small government, lean but effective law -- the conversation would be much different. In fact, many in the center and even onthe left would gladly sit down and see what we could do together. The problemis your backward social policy.

The majority of Americans can see what the GOP is: the party of the past. Your base is predominantly old, white, enragedmale Christians who resent/hate blacks, minorities, women, and anyone who thinksdifferently. Your irrational disdain and fear of gays would belaughable if it wasn’t so virulent. Most people -- most good people -- do not like to demonize others let alone their fellowcitizens.

You make demonizing people a major part of your platform and thepropaganda that motivates your base. Let me repeat that: you demonize people as ameans to inspire people. And your base -- led around by their noses by their owndelusional media and drug-addict "personalities" -- eats it up. Whetherit’s denying adults the fundamental human right to marry whoever they wish, painting otherreligions as stupid or evil without examining the stupidity and evil of your ownreligion, or actually believing that anyone—especially your fellowAmericans that have different political ideas and solutions—are immoral andtreasonous. We know all this because it’s all you talk about. You have nothing to add tothe conversation but vitriol. Your biggest idea is to suggest we tear the wholething down. Probably so you can try and rebuild it the manner only you approveof.

Those on the right are fond of parroting patriotic lines about liberty, but how do you envision this liberty?It is a liberty for those willing to follow your very narrow and myopic visionof the universe -- all justified by nothing more than spurious arguments from authoritydemanding submission to your ideals and morals. There is nothing about yourrhetoric or actions that suggest liberty. In fact it is the opposite.

Conservatism tyrannically holds people to the ideals and traditions of apast that never existed, or more importantly, one to which no sane person wouldwant to return.

The vast majority of your attacks on BLACK President Barack Obama have been not only ineffective but delusional and dividing. The unhinged nature of your hate—which really is largely racism—doesn’t allow actual governing to take place. There are real and valid criticisms of Obama's policies. However, these rational conversations cannot take place while you bang the drum of racist demagoguery, dictatorship conspiracies and for godssake anti-Christ claims.

Bottom line: you are all simply crazy. No rational conversation can occur regarding how to improve our collective fate while you allow, participate and encourage extremists to take the wheel.In short, there is nothing wrong with the direction ofAmerica. There is something wrong with your archaic, stagnant beliefs and policies.

You're an endangered species. Either adapt or go extinct. Personally, if it should be the latter I and many of your fellow Americans won't miss you.

Do any of the people here whining about parasites and the entitled appreciate that some of the biggest parasites to our economy are big pharma and the insurance companies, for all they suck out of the Government and taxpayers?

When are you liberals going to realize the 48% of American who voted for Romney are the ones who start/run most businesses and create jobs? The 52% who voted for Obama are the WIC mothers, welfare recipients, artist, actors, government and NGO employees. You may have the numbers to win a national election but you are still living off our hard work. Most of you don't even pay taxes. I don't see why we let you vote.

Harry Reid should prepare for a fight with Boehner and McConnell. Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner still have their heads buried in an orifice. This lame-duck session will not get anything done with Boehner's attitude. Boehner's stop-gap approach is not sufficient to fix the problems. All that spent money got the TEA-Republicans nothing! Harry Reid is in the driver's seat and Boehner should compromise. There should be no dilly dallying by the recently defeated TEA-Republican party. Stopgap legislation is just kicking the can down the road. This lame-duck session will not get anything done with his attitude. Boehner's stop-gap approach is not sufficient to fix the problems. Harry Reid is in the driver's seat and Boehner should compromise. There should be no dilly dallying by the recently defeated TEA-Republican party. Boehner's "It's the law of the land" statement coupled with, "the election changes that" are both suspect because he also said "We're ready to lead, not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans. Specifying he would accept a deal as long as it linked an overhaul to entitlements and reform of the tax code that closes loopholes, curtails or eliminates deductions and lowers income tax rates. First, entitlements are not to be adjusted or messed with as those entitlements have already been earned.

Typical liberals on this comment thread. Stick your heads in the sand and ignore the fact that the Federal Government is spending our children's futures. Unfortunately, we need to reduce entitlements. I don't like it but if we keep on the same trajectory we are going to bankrupt our country.

Morons like MrObvious and Hollywooddeed are too ignorant to understand the basic notion of not spending more than you have.

But from what I read it seems to be a bunch of talking points glued together.

I think the sum of your rant is evident here

We were free and now not so much, at least that is the gov'ts goal. That you can believe.

Illustrating perfectly well this

but alas what can I expect from someone that is unequipped to argue with facts and intelligence. I fail to see "racist theories" you claim, since all my comments are backed by facts. Google/Bing search any of them

You can google and bing a lot of things.

Like if you google 18 and virgin you'll get a lot of women claiming that they are, but considering the enhancements and their 'skills' I very much doubt so.

What I'm trying to tell you that claiming a lot of things and telling someone to google that claim does not prove that it's a 'fact'. That only means that in lack of actual data you're telling us that people that share your opinion somehow validify what you write.

So no. Facts are facts; not a bunch of string cheese factoids bouncing around in the vacuous internet opinionsphere.

And why do I tell you that?

We were free and now not so much, at least that is the gov'ts goal. That you can believe.

Your entire rant is a bunch of unsubstantiated opinionated statements and most of them about Obama and about liberals - and less about actual conservative values. You can always spot a lazy mind by how their entire argument is more about someone else than what they believe.

"Would you rather have a civil rights lawyer as a prez. or a man that made millions from building and maintaining companies."

I would much rather have a Constitutional Lawyer as President versus a Vulture Capitalist, and so would America as we saw on Tuesday. Your rant is hysterical; calm down, the world will keep on spinning for the next four years.

That's the Democrat's base, ktanktan. We are their enemies, according to Obama. They hate business and corporations, but they luvs them some of them goodies from the taxes that those businesses pay. Unable to make it on their own they are bitter, angry, jealous, and ungrateful. Like their president, they have no idea how to run a business, or an economy.

ignore the fact that the Federal Government is spending our children's futures. Unfortunately, we need to reduce entitlements. I don't like it but if we keep on the same trajectory we are going to bankrupt our country.

Also

Morons like MrObvious and Hollywooddeed are too ignorant to understand the basic notion of not spending more than you have.

But I do know math - when you get in less revenue - increase it.

When you want companies to invest in this country educate your population and remove incentives for said companies to setup up shop elsewhere and still be able to use our infrastructure to unload their profits and goods.

Of course righties best arguments is usually to throw out unsubstantial sky is falling scenarios they never worried about when their rightwing presidents spent the previous 11 trillion dollars.

I'll worry a heap more about rightwingers newfound fiscal underpants when they start acting the way they preach.

@DonQuixotic@LikeNoOther Ok so obviously I voted Republican, but in all seriousness and insults aside, the person who I actually would like to see run in the next election is Hilary Clinton. I know not many may agree with me and I know She's a dem., but I think She has the skills, experience, knowledge, and back bone to make a truly positive difference. I hate when people are so quick to call me a tea-bagger and right extremist, etc. I want someone that will LEAD the country, not RUN it. Leading gives the feeling of involvement and running is just that. I feel Obamacare was done without the citizens consent and involvement. They are telling Us what we will get and what doctors to see. They are candy coating it when the media explains it. No one person can make everyone happy, but I think Hilary Clinton can make a majority happy. I know the insults are coming. No one is free to have view without ignorance and name calling thrown at them.

@53_3@LikeNoOther Hmmm, quick to name call as I knew some would be. Hence my comments about not name calling, but alas what can I expect from someone that is unequipped to argue with facts and intelligence. I fail to see "racist theories" you claim, since all my comments are backed by facts. Google/Bing search any of them. Stacey Dash among other colored celebs, received a huge amount of backlash for endorsing Romney. The same goes for white voters that voted for Romney because he is white. People need to vote on qualification not color. As long as color continues to be made an issue then this country will continue to be held back. I often refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person, such as yourself. You can rest easy and go back to throwing out inane comments and uneducated insults.

Really you should be the Secretary of the Economy. Nobody else could figure it out but you. It's sheer genius. All because YOU know math. Man, that 9th grade education came through for you after all, Mr 0. To think that people waste years going to college and getting MBAs and Doctorates and you solve the problem with just two words "increase it." Fire the Fed chairman, and that tax cheat at Treasury. Give this man the Nobel Prize.

I don't google blogs spots. I say Google loosely, as a means to do an internet search. Document searches and such. I dont' consider Huffpo and AOL as valid fact sites if that's what you were thinking. I'm sorry if my typing is to close for you.

Then why do your 'facts' come across as opinions based on someones internet rant?

So you must have heard about death panels to know what I referring to. You're right about every insurance company having things that are covered and not covered. The difference is that we pay for that little feature by choice. That can be a whole other debt and discussion.

You're missing the point. There are no death panels. What Sarah Palin coined is also something she got terrible wrong. Not only once, but like three time in a short rant.

We as a country were not involved in the decision of Obamacare, the politicians were.

They always are. See legislation is only the beginning of the end of the solution to what people echo.

Sometimes the legislation is terrible, void of the solution full of waste and payback to the people who pay for politicians campaigns.

Other times legislation is good - ACA in my opinion was a valid attempt to a big problem but with such a centrist slant that it falls short of solving the over all problem.

And it definitely echoes a lot of what voters are asking for but in doing so it solves some of that by giving more power to for profit insurance - which is one of the big problems with healthcare today.

But it doesn't remove patients from their doctors - it's the opposite - and it doesn't put government in control of your healthcare.

And there's no deathpanel that decide who lives or dies. That's nonsense.

@MrObvious@LikeNoOther I don't google blogs spots. I say Google loosely, as a means to do an internet search. Document searches and such. I dont' consider Huffpo and AOL as valid fact sites if that's what you were thinking. I'm sorry if my typing is to close for you. I forget my double space between sentences at times. Yes sometimes I seem to rant because I get ahead of myself. I often forget to breathe between thoughts. Kidding. I say all this with a genuine smile. So you must have heard about death panels to know what I referring to. You're right about every insurance company having things that are covered and not covered. The difference is that we pay for that little feature by choice. That can be a whole other debt and discussion. We as a country were not involved in the decision of Obamacare, the politicians were. Thank you for not insulting me, and my reference to ignorance was about the people that prefer to name call instead of the calm and thought out response that you gave.

Note that Hillary, much like Obama have had very little business experience and a lot of civil servant experience.

What you attack in one person you praise in another. You won't find much difference in approach between Obama and Hillary since both of them are Centrists much like Bill Clinton.

I feel Obamacare was done without the citizens consent and involvement.

You feel or you know? Who told you - what sources gave you that idea? See I read the bill and formed my opinion about the bill based on me looking into it. I usually don't filter what I think through someone elses opinion.

Take this nugget

This is a sum up of the "panel" on Obamacare, the "panel" will choose who gets to stay and who is deemed terminal.

THERE ARE NO DEATHPANELS. Even moreso - every single insurance company have 'panels' that decide what procedure is covered by their insurance and what isn't.

You feel for the idiocy and you're forming your opinion on complete garbage.

They are telling Us what we will get and what doctors to see.

NO THEY ARE NOT. False - insurance companies today decide if a specific doctor is in our outside their network. They effectively decide if you can see someone or not, since going outside network will cost you a fortune. Where do you get this stuff from? Let me guess - the same sources you can google and bing.

I know the insults are coming. No one is free to have view without ignorance and name calling thrown at them.

You won't get any insult from me - but if you truly believe that we're ignorant for calling you out, then you haven't really thought long and hard over how you present yourself.

@EugenePesikov@LikeNoOther@53_3 You are replying to a reply of a comment that is no longer posted. You're coming in on the back-end of a disagreement...so you really can't make the assumption you did. You missed the original comment that was the cause of the disagreement.

@LikeNoOther@53_3 wholly smokes, thankless unknown hero! how'd you accurately figure out that a majority of the country-- which are the 'whites'-- ignored the qualifications of the presidential candidates and voted against their own skin color when casting their vote for the colored socialist, black, kenyan born FEMA-brownshirt-army backed Obama?! I mean, you have got to continue getting this message of truth out there so the world can know whats going on here!

A NATION OF WHITE PEOPLE VOTING FOR A BLACK MAN MUST MEAN ONLY 1 THING= THERE ARE MORE UNDERCOVER WHITE-SKINNED BLACK PEOPLE THAN INITIALLY THOUGHT!

@53_3@LikeNoOther Why are you so rude? Were you not loved enough as a child? If my question was in reference to being polite and PC when referring to someones color, then why must you spew insults. So when the news is on and refers to what a burglar or suspect looks like, should they refer to that person with a description of "He was 6', thin build and his color was 'hi there, how are you'?" If you're going to answer stick the the topic at hand.

@TyPollard@LikeNoOther@53_3 What does NAACP mean? What is the correct term then? To say African-American would be stereotyping that all black people are from Africa when there are white people from Africa, hello Charlize Theron. Haitians aren't African. Dominicans? Please tell me the polite way to refer to non-Caucasian people.

Really you should be the Secretary of the Economy. Nobody else could figure it out but you. It's sheer genius. All because YOU know math. Man, that 9th grade education came through for you after all, Mr 0. To think that people waste years going to college and getting MBAs and Doctorates and you solve the problem with just two words "increase it." Fire the Fed chairman, and that tax cheat at Treasury. Give this man the Nobel Prize.

Thanks for your example of being a sarcastic prick. It was entertaining in a teeny kind of way.

And yes - simplistically when you don't have enough revenue you increase it and it's an absolute fact that the reason why we're currently running a deficit is because spending on 2 wars, medicare part D, tax cut and the recession.

The other so called 'entitlements' have staid pretty much linear while the other 'spendings' have increased dramatically.

Yet your remedy (and that of righties) is to cut the things that have not really increased.

Created? Obama started those wars? Obama cut those taxes? Obama de-regulated the financial sector? Really? The only thing Obama added to the deficit that he actually had a choice about was choosing to put Bush's wars on the books instead of deceptively funding them with emergency measure after emergency measure to hide the true cost from the American people.

Come on man, seriously, learn a bit before you talk about stuff that matters.